1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to the field of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tags and labels.
2. Description of the Related Art
There is no simple definition of what constitutes an antenna, as all dielectric and conductive objects interact with electromagnetic fields (radio waves). What are generally called antennas are simply shapes and sizes that generate a voltage at convenient impedance for connection to circuits and devices. Almost anything can act to some degree as an antenna. However, there are some practical constraints on what designs can be used with RFID tags and labels.
First, reciprocity is a major consideration in making a design choice. This means that an antenna which will act as a transmitter, converting a voltage on its terminal(s) into a radiated electromagnetic wave, will also act as a receiver, where an incoming electromagnetic wave will cause/induce a voltage across the terminals. Frequently it is easier to describe the transmitting case, but, in general, a good transmit antenna will also work well as a receive antenna (like all rules, there are exceptions at lower frequencies, but for UHF, in the 900 MHz band and above where RFID tags and labels commonly operate, this holds generally true).
Nevertheless, even given the above, it is difficult to determine what is a ‘good’ antenna other than to require that it is one that does what you want, where you want and is built how you want it to be.
However, there are some features that are useful as guides in determining whether or not an antenna is ‘good’ for a particular purpose. When one makes a connection to an antenna, one can measure the impedance of the antenna at a given frequency. Impedance is generally expressed as a composite of two parts; a resistance, R, expressed in ohms, and a reactance, X, also expressed in ohms, but with a ‘j’ factor in front to express the fact that reactance is a vector quantity. The value of jX can be either capacitive, where it is a negative number, or inductive, where it is a positive number.
Having established what occurs when one measures the impedance of an antenna, one can consider the effect of the two parts on the antenna's suitability or performance in a particular situation.
Resistance R is actually a composite of two things; the loss resistance of the antenna, representing the tendency of any signal applied to it to be converted to heat, and the radiation resistance, representing energy being ‘lost’ out of the antenna by being radiated away, which is what is desired in an antenna. The ratio of the loss resistance and the radiation resistance is described as the antenna efficiency. A low efficiency antenna, with a large loss resistance and relatively small radiation resistance, will not work well in most situations, as the majority of any power put into it will simply appear as heat and not as useful electromagnetic waves.
The effects of Reactance X are slightly more complex than that for Resistance R. Reactance X, the inductive or capacitive reactance of an antenna, does not dissipate energy. In fact, it can be lessened, by introducing a resonant circuit into the system. Simply, for a given value of +jX (an inductor), there is a value of −jX (a capacitor) that will resonate/cancel it, leaving just the resistance R.
Another consideration is bandwidth, frequently described using the term Q (originally Quality Factor). To understand the effect of bandwidth, it is not necessary to understand the mathematics; simply, if an antenna has a value of +jX or −jX representing a large inductance or capacitance, when one resonates this out it will only become a pure resistance over a very narrow frequency band. For example, for a system operating over the band 902 MHz to 928 MHz, if a highly reactive antenna were employed, it might only produce the wanted R over a few megahertz. In addition, high Q/narrow band matching solutions are unstable, in that very small variations in component values or designs will cause large changes in performance. So high Q narrowband solutions are something, in practical RFID tag designs, to be avoided.
An RFID tag, in general, consists of 1) an RFID chip, containing rectifiers to generate a DC power supply from the incoming RF signal, logic to carry out the identification function and an impedance modulator, which changes the input impedance to cause a modulated signal to be reflected; and, 2) an antenna as described above.
Each of these elements has an associated impedance. If the chip impedance (which tends to be capacitive) and the antenna impedance (which is whatever it is designed to be) are the conjugate of each other, then one can simply connect the chip across the antenna and a useful tag is created. For common RFID chips the capacitance is such that a reasonably low Q adequate bandwidth match can be achieved at UHF frequencies.
However, sometimes it is not so simple to meet operational demands for the tag due to environmental or manufacturing constraints, and then other ways of achieving a good match must be considered. The most common method of maintaining a desired impedance match, is to place between the antenna and chip an impedance matching network. An impedance matching network is usually a network of inductors and capacitors that act to transform both real and reactive parts of the input impedance to a desired level. These components do not normally include resistors, as these dissipate energy, which will generally lead to lower performance.
Difficulties can arise in impedance matching, because the impedance characteristics of an antenna may be affected by its surroundings. This may in turn affect the quality of the impedance matching between the antenna and the RFID chip, and thus the read range for the RFID tag.
The surroundings that may affect the characteristics of the antenna include the substrate material upon which the antenna is mounted, and the characteristics of other objects in the vicinity of the RFID tag. For example, the thickness and/or dielectric constant of the substrate material may affect antenna operation. As another example, placement of conducting or non-conducting objects near the tag may affect the operating characteristics of the antenna, and thus the read range of the tag.
An antenna may be tuned to have desired characteristics for any given configuration of substrate and objects placed around. For example, if each tag could be tuned individually to adjust the arm length and/or add a matching network, consisting of adjustable capacitors and inductors, the tag could be made to work regardless of the dielectric constant of the block. However, individual tuning of antennas would not be practical from a business perspective.
As discussed above, frequently designers optimize tag performance for ‘free space’, a datum generally given a nominal relative dielectric constant of 1. However, in the real world, the objects the labels are attached to frequently do not have a dielectric constant of 1, but instead have dielectric constants or environments of nearby objects that vary widely. For example, a label having a dipole antenna designed and optimized for ‘free space’ that is instead attached to an object having a dielectric constant that differs from that of ‘free space,’ will suffer a degraded performance, usually manifesting itself as reduced operational range and other inefficiencies as discussed above.
Therefore, while products having differing fixed dielectric constant substrates can be accommodated by changing the antenna design from the ‘free space’ design to incorporate the new dielectric constant or to compensate for other objects expected to be nearby the tag, this design change forces the tag manufacturer to produce a broader range of labels or tags, potentially a different type for each target product for which the tag may be applied, hence increasing costs and forcing an inventory stocking problem for the tag manufacturers.
When the tags are to be used on different types of materials that have a range of variable dielectric constants, the best design performance that can be achieved by the tag or label designer is to design or tune the tag for the average value of the range of dielectric constants and expected conditions, and accept degraded performance and possible failures caused by significant detuning in specific cases.
It will be appreciated that improvements would be desirable with regard to the above state of affairs.